Outrage grows over scandal-tainted Malaysian leader

• 

Sarawak's 74-year-old chief minister Taib Mahmud. Photo: AFP

Despite earning a civil servant’s salary for three decades, Taib Mahmud, the powerful chief minister of Malaysia’s Sarawak state, is reputed by critics to be one of Asia’s richest men.

Taib, 77, and his family are accused of massive corruption and running Malaysia’s largest state like a family business, controlling its biggest companies with stakes in hundreds of corporations in Malaysia and abroad.

A Rolls Royce and flashy jet cover his transportation, while a vast war chest has kept his political authority unrivalled in 32 years in charge of the resource-rich Borneo island state, which remains one of Malaysia’s poorest.

“The amount of control he has is astounding. He has been able to dominate politics and society here for nearly four decades,” said Faisal Hazis, a political scientist with Universiti Malaysia Sarawak.

But pressure is rising both at home and abroad for action against a man referred to by his harshest critics as the “thief minister” and viewed as the prime example of a culture of corruption fuelling public disgust.

Swiss-based activists Bruno Manser Fund (BMF), citing financial records, last year estimated the 77-year-old’s worth at US$15 billion, which would make him Malaysia’s richest person.

Such revelations are hugely embarrassing for Prime Minister Najib Razak, who faces a slide in support due in part to corruption blamed for bleeding the country of billions of dollars annually.

But Taib, a member of Malaysia’s 56-year-old ruling coalition, is widely considered untouchable because the Sarawak parliamentary bloc he controls helps keep the coalition in power.

“We don’t see the political will to address grand corruption like this and it could destroy the country” by crippling economic development, said Josie Fernandez, Transparency International’s Malaysia director.

A 2008 US State Department cable revealed by WikiLeaks called Taib “highly corrupt” and “unchallenged”, saying Taib-linked companies dominate Sarawak’s emerging economy.

He and his family are accused of routinely taking kickbacks for lucrative government contracts or awarding the projects to companies they control.

A prime example dominates the languid capital Kuching - the state-assembly building whose swooping, golden roof gleams like a crown in the tropical sun.

A Taib-linked company won the US$98 million contract to build the structure, which opened in 2009 and is home to a legislature he controls. A similar story surrounds a futuristic convention centre nearby.

Taib’s office declined repeated interview requests.

A member of the Melanau tribe, supporters see him as defender of the autonomy of Sarawak - which is marked by Christian and tribal groups - against the Muslim Malay-dominated federal coalition based on mainland Malaysia.

Taib denies wrongdoing, saying Sarawak must be developed for its 2.4 million people. His critics spout “a web of lies and half-truths wrapped around ignorance and twisted logic”, he fumed last year.

But pressure grows, including in the rugged interior where Taib is blamed for decimating vast rainforests through logging and dam projects and evicting tribes from ancestral lands, sparking protests.

Philip Jau travelled for two days by road with dozens of his Kayan tribesmen to protest this week in Kuching against a mega-dam pushed by Taib on the remote Baram river despite local opposition.

“The dam is a curse from hell,” said Jau, wearing a feather-strewn traditional woven cap. “Taib will benefit, but he is killing the people.”

Jau fears the dam will destroy a river ecosystem the Kayan rely on, noting that tribes near the already-completed Bakun dam, Malaysia’s largest, say that has happened there.

BMF head Lukas Strauman said Taib and his family are the “chief culprits in destroying one of the world’s last great rainforest areas.”

In December, Swiss parliamentarians called for a freeze on any Taib assets there, saying he had abused office “in a spectacular way”. Swiss authorities are yet to respond.

Malaysia’s anti-graft agency launched an investigation in 2011, but it is widely accused of foot-dragging.

Faisal said action is highly unlikely as Sarawak seats proved crucial to the federal coalition winning May 5 elections, showing Taib is “more important than ever” to the government. Premier Najib’s office declined to comment.

Taib has gotten even richer since the polls.

Shares of Taib-linked CMS -- Sarawak’s largest conglomerate - have soared 65 per cent following the ruling-coalition win, and the compliant state assembly tripled Taib’s pay to nearly US$400,000 on Tuesday - his birthday.

~ AFP

Anti-dam activists continue to make presence felt at hydropower congress

Friday May 24, 2013

Passionate: Kallang airing his views at the 'Working with Project-Affected Communities' focus session yesterday.

KUCHING: From donning traditional gear during protests to wearing suits and speaking as conference delegates, anti-dam activists continue to make their presence felt at the International Hydropower Association World Congress.

On the second day of seminars and talks at the Borneo Convention Centre Kuching here, activists such as Peter Kallang managed to raise criticism about proposals to build more dams in this state.

Other critics who managed to speak during question time and at focus sessions included Ding Seling and Ding Juh, longhouse residents near the proposed Baram dam, and members of state government recognised bodies like Asap Koyan Development Committee director Henry Luhat.

Arguably, it was Kallang, who is Save Rivers chairman, who garnered the most attention.

He told delegates at two different talks yesterday that, one, the Government must not act and speak only “like a lawyer”, and second, some in the rural areas have protested simply because they felt they “didn’t have a voice”.

He also lamented access to information like environmental impact assessments was bound in red tape, leaving undereducated rural dwellers ill-informed, confused and easily manipulated.

Kallang then asserted that it was not wrong for the affected to stage blockades and protests.

“I will not apologise. We will go on demonstrating,” he said, addressing the delegates during the “Working with Project-Affected Communities” focus session, which was packed to the brim, despite other concurrent sessions.

When asked to respond to a state government official who said authorities were acting above and beyond what the Malaysian law required when resettling people, Kallang told reporters: “Is there a law to love your mother and father?

“It is an unwritten law, it is a general law that, if you do something like this, you must consider what the impact is. He (the official) is speaking like that because he is a lawyer. It’s quite inhumane.

“Go to the Sungai Asap resettlement, where there is just one school. The Penan resettlement is about 10km away (from the school). Because they have little money, they cannot afford the school bus. During lunch time, they cannot eat, because they don’t have money.

“The school says food is only provided for boarders. Why is the Government not doing anything? Is it not very sad?” he said.

However, Kallang did agree with certain relocation mechanisms. When asked on the large amounts of compensation requested by some affected, he said it was right for the Government to adopt a systematic way of helping rural communities, rather than give big payouts that could be squandered quickly.

Earlier, Sarawak government advisor and former state attorney-general Datuk JC Fong told the focus session it would be irresponsible for the authorities to allow large sums of one-off compensations.

He said significant compensations were provided to those resettled during the construction of Sarawak’s first hydropower dam at Batang Ai in the 1970s.

“I speak from experience. I saw these huge compensations, but those compensated became poor very soon thereafter, because money was not properly spent. They were back at the same level of poverty.”

Fong defended the state government’s track record and intentions for future development. He said there had been shortcomings in the past but that the state was a developing economy that was responsible to meet consistent growth rates, while tackling a steep learning curve.

The biggest challenge, Fong said, was to balance needs between those already developed — like urban folk and highly educated graduates — and rural people still living in a subsistence economy.

“These (latter group of) people affected are the ones who are transiting from the subsistence economy to being part of the modern, mainstream, cash economy,” Fong said.

Speakers like Labang Paneh, 36, married with five children, from Murum, spoke about his unhappiness with relocation.

An ex-timber camp worker, who could not speak English and needed the help of a translator, Labang told the focus session that those in power needed to pay greater emphasis on local needs.

Labang highlighted that the resettlement houses for those affected by Murum were “of high quality, but that none wanted a gas (cooker hub in the) kitchen”.

He said locals had submitted complaints and followed up with proposals for a “wood burning” kitchen instead. He said it was small details like that which would ease the transition.

“Tell the people simple things like when is the time to move, who will be moving first. If we don’t know clearly, then there will be resistance We know why we have low standard of living, and we know why others have higher standard of living — it is because they have better education.”

~ The Star

ALI BIJU'S SPEECH DUN May 2013

DEBATE SPEECH BY ALI BIJU, ADUN N34 (KRIAN), ON THE MOTION TO RESPOND TO THE SPEECH BY THE TYT GOVERNOR, DUN 20-29 MAY 2013.

Datuk Speaker Sir,

I rise to join my honourable colleagues in this dignified and noble House to draw your attention to how the Tuan Yang Terutama’s speech would be well reciprocated within the context of the constituency I represent, Krian with the following issues.

No 1. The Condition of Rural Primary Schools in Krian.

“THE YOUTHS OF TODAY WILL BE THE LEADERS OF TOMORROW” is the maxim we are all well aware of. And yet, this precious investment of ours, the young minds that need nurturing, is not well taken care of. Pupils are crammed in depilated classrooms where they have to endure an uncomfortable environment that is not conducive to learning. Pupils’ and teachers’ furniture need overhaul. Learning materials are scarce and pupils often have to share learning tools just in order to complete their class projects. Contrast this with pupils in schools in the urban centres and cities. It is a far cry. How are we going to expect our rural children to progress on par with their city cousins if this is allowed to continue?

Their teachers likewise have to endure issues of their own. One major issue is that many teachers have to commute daily from Saratok town to schools situated in the rural interior simply because of the insufficiency of living quarters. With the appalling conditions of rural roads in Krian, it compounds the harsh daily life of teaching at rural primary schools. Teachers commuting daily have to fight small battles on the way to school even before arriving at their destination. Is this how we treat our educators? Are there no funds to build extra teachers quarters in one of the richest states of Malaysia?

Nevertheless, what is most disheartening is the state of the boarding houses for our young minds. Do the honourable members of this most dignified House know and realise that, for example, the very young pupils at Sekolah Kebangsaan Brayang, are forced to even share mattresses in their tiny boarding rooms? Are the young children of our honourable members forced to live like sardines in a tin can? If we in this noble House will not allow our own children to suffer such shocking living conditions, how can we close a blind eye to our rural relatives’ children to live in such despicable and dire conditions in the interior? Is it not shameful for wealthy and resource rich Sarawak to close a blind eye to this endemic problem throughout the state, let alone Krian?

If you are shocked, allow me to shock you further, my honourable colleagues. Are you aware that the quality of food has drastically declined in the past two years for rural boarding schools? The vast majority of rural primary school pupils are boarders, as we know. It has come to my attention that the ration provision for rural primary schools Category A has been reduced to RM8 person per day. Let me break it down so you know exactly how much a pupil is entitled to: Breakfast RM1.20; Lunch RM2.40; Tea Break RM1.00; Dinner RM2.40; and Supper RM1.00. Would you feed your growing child RM8 per day.However, the question on my mind is how much exactly trickles down to the tables of the pupils after the suppliers and contractors have taken their cut for profit? RM5 ringgit perhaps, and is this what we are spending on feeding our rural pupils on a daily basis?

Inflation and the increase in food prices only mean that our rural children are fed very poor quality food. We do not need scientific data and research to tell us all that the nutritional value of meals for young and growing pupils is vital for their health and growth and ensuing academic performance. And yet the Ministry of Education has reduced the much needed food rations for rural schools! I would like the Ministry of Education to conduct a study into this blatant disregard for the health of Sarawakian pupils in the interior, and give us a reasonable explanation as to why the need to reduce the ration, instead of increasing it in the light of the economic downturn and rising cost of food supplies, when the people who need it most are made to suffer unjustly.

2. Section 6 and the Ambiguous Perimeter Survey.

To many honourable members across the floor of this House, the contentious issue of Section 6 and the equally debatable policy of ‘Perimeter Survey’ may seem superfluous and redundant. Nevertheless, we on this side of the floor will not desist from engaging the current Government on this matter. Notice that I use the term ‘policy’, and not ‘law’.

Case in point: the Tuai Rumah of Sungai Bangkong was strongly advised by the Penghulu of the area to sign paperwork to agree to have a vast area of native customary right land lands in the Krian constituency to be surveyed and gazetted under Section 6 of Sarawak Land Code. However, there are many native land areas called pulau galau within Krian constituency includes such places as Sg Ijan Kabo , Melupa, Babang, Mapar, Ulu Krian-Rimbas. The Tuai Rumah adamantly refused. The Penghulu is still insisting that the Tuai Rumah sign the papers. This blatant act of compelling the Tuai Rumah is tantamount to suggesting that ownership of native customary right lands lies in the hands of the Penghulu and not the people who live and depend on the same land for their livelihoods. But that is not the prime issue at hand.

The question I pose to this dignified house is simple. Is the pulau galau of Sg Ijan Kabo, Melupa, Babang, Mapar, Ulu Krian-Rimbas, recognised by the Sarawak State Government as Native Customary Right Lanad, or once surveyed under perimeter survey and place under Section 6, revert to becoming de facto State land? The entire native residents and descendants of these areas are very concerned and worry of the implication resulted from perimeter survey initiative. It is a simple question, and I expect a simple answer from the Government. I repeat, is PULAU GALAU, once surveyed together with other lands under Section 6, still native customary right land or does it become State land by the virtue that the State can claim the land and has the sole prerogative over it? Let us not forget that the Courts of Malaysia, right up to the Federal Court, have decided clearly on the matter, but my question is, what is the State’s position on this very crucial legal point, as the residents of the affected area and their future descendants, would very much like to also know the answer to this question. In fact, the entire natives of Sarawak would also like to hear the response of the State.

3. Rural Electrification Scheme (RES).

At the May DUN Sitting of 2012, the Minister had solemnly promised that the State would undertake to resolve a vital issue of the Rural Electrification Scheme set up to cover the areas of Ulu Awik and Ulu Kabo, which includes and affects twenty five longhouses and 3 rural primary schools, namely SK Nanga Apan, SK UluAwik and SK Lempa, which I had earlier brought up in the previous DUN sitting.

The issue herein is that SALCRA has refused to cooperate by allowing transmission lines to be erected along the roads and have its oil palm trees cut down. Can the Minister update this dignified House specifically when will the State rectify this matter and over-rule SALCRA’s defiance? Again, I return to the issue of our rural pupils suffering unnecessarily at the expense of unreasonable commercial interests. Three primary schools have to depend on electric generators. What is the State’s priority; commercial interests of the few or the development of the rural interior?

Whilst we are on the subject or RES, may I also ask the Minister when the government will bring RES to other areas in Krian constituency such as Kop-Ibus, Ulu Sebetan, Beratong-Supok, Sungai Kara, Munggu Embawang, Sungai Belong and Tanjong Sikup?

4. Clean Water Supply and the construction of the Saratok Water Treatment Plant at Kaki Wong.

The new water treatment plant being built at Kaki Wong is a good step by the State to bring clean water supply to Saratok. The questions at hand are four-fold: Firstly, what is the progress of works on the construction and when can we expect the plant to be fully completed? Secondly, if there is any delay to the completion of works, will there be a penalty ‘LAD-liquidate and ascertained damages’ imposed? Thirdly, what are the plans of the State to upgrade the old piping system which will not be able to withstand the stronger water pressure that will be generated from the new plant? And finally, the situation is more acute in the town area of Saratok where shop-houses and the surrounding residential areas are experiencing water shortage even though water supply is sufficient. A thorough study needs to be conducted to remedy the existing problematic old piping system in order to solve the persistent overall water issues faced by the residents, as well as the entire Krian which has been promised clean water supply by the Minister in the DUN Sitting of May 2012.

5. Road Infrastructure.

The constituents of Krian would like to know the following:

5.1 The on-going upgrading work that is being carried out to tar-seal Ulu Krian and Ulu Awik Road is taking much too long. Is the current work progress delayed or ahead of schedule? What is the actual work scope namely the actual length of Ulu Awik and Ulu Krian Roads to be tar-sealed under current contract? Is there close monitor of the work being carried out by the contractor to ensure compliance with standards and specifications as per the contract?

5.2Engkudu-Sungai Anak Road was tar-sealed for only a mere and paltry 750metres recently. The road users would like to know when the remaining 5.5km will be tar-sealed? Heavy vehicles from plantation companies nearby are using the road extensively and this is already causing damage to the gravel road.  

5.3Rumah Ibi, Nanga Ibus, is unique since it is the only longhouse in N.34 Krian which does not enjoy the connection of an access road. The longhouse folks have to use small longboat down the Sungai Seblak to access Roban, the nearest town. Sungai Seblak is notoriously infested with crocodiles. Three successive Earth-Breaking ceremonies have been conducted but to date, no road is in sight. Is bovernment going to keep its promise or let the matter be quietly swept into the crocodile infested Sungai Seblak?  

5.4 Other roads that need upgrading are Bajau Road, Nanga Batang Road, Babang-Krangan Rusa Road, Nanga Alum Road, Mudong Road and Sungai Engkabang Road, and the constituents of these areas await with bated breath for a reply.

6. Rest Area at SimpangSaratok.

It is commendable that FELCRA has developed the Simpang Saratok Rest Area. The up-grading included new facilities for food stalls. Nevertheless, I would like to point out that all the stalls cater only halal food. This does not address the more pertinent need to cater for motorists and drivers who rest there seeking non-halal food. Thus, I urge local authorities to develop extension rest area in adjacent to the existing specifically to cater for the need of non-halal food among motorists. This initiative is expected boost further the popularity of simpang saratok rest area.

Datuk Speaker Sir. With these rebuttals to the Tuan Yang Terutama’s speech, I take my leave and rest my case. Finally I would like to wish Selamat Gawai Dayak, gayu guru, gerai nyamai, chelap embap, nguan menoa.

ALI BIJU

ADUN

N34 KRIAN

SEE CHEE HOW'S SPEECH DUN May 2013

                                           

Datuk Speaker,

Thank you for allowing me to participate in this debate on the Motion of appreciation to his Excellency Tuan Yang Terutama Yang Di Pertua Negeri’s Address on 20th May, 2013 and at the same time to raise some issues of concerned in this August House.

The revision of the allowance, salary and benefits of members of the administration and members of Dewan Undangan Negeri  with the passing of the Remuneration, Pensions and Gratuities Bill 2013 has not only provided such allowance, salary and benefits which commensurate with the work and responsibilities of members of the administration and Honourable members of this Dewan, it also underscores the financial strength and capacity of our beloved State.

In the premise, I am obliged to echo the concerns of Honourable members in this August House that it bears on us a heavy responsibility to formulate and implement policies and programmes which will result to the benefits and interests of all Sarawakians as a whole.

Indeed, we should always be reminded that the moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped. A famous statement of the 38th American Vice President, Hubert Humphrey, which have so often been quoted.

I would like to confine myself to what we can do to benefit the senior citizens in this debate.

Care for the Senior citizens

When a copy of the Social Statistic Bulletin Malaysia 2012 was handed to me last month, I could not help notice the insufficiency of welfare services and support we have in Malaysia, particularly Sarawak, for the senior citizens, or those referred to as “in the twilight of life” 40 years ago.

In the Bulletin that was produced by the Statistics Department, the number of inmates in government funded welfare service institutions by type of services to the end of 2011 are:

1,804 inmates in Seri Kenangan Homes, 939 inmates in Desa Bina Diri homes, and 227 in Ehsan homes.

The Desa Bina Diri Homes are not homes for the senior citizens but, as provided under the Destitute Persons Act 1977, are centres for the protection of destitute persons or vagrants from public displeasure.

I do not recall seeing any Ehsan Home or House For Destitute Patients in Sarawak, but those homes are to provide care, treatment and shelter to the old and sick older persons of our society, 60 years and above, without family or guardian or they cannot be traced or incapable of caring for the patient, and the applicants are without income and mean of support.

We could only find the Seri Kenangan Homes in Sarawak which are to provide care, treatment and shelter to poor older persons for the sake of their well being and quality of life. However, the Seri Kenangan Homes are only to cater for those above 60 years old, not suffering from an infectious disease, are without relatives, do not have permanent homes, and are able to take care of themselves.

From the national figure of 1,804 inmates, it appears that this public institution is of little assistance to the community of senior citizens. The privately run welfare homes, nursing homes and care centres would have more inmates and patients.

With our state’s financial strength and capacity, I certainly hope that we will be the first in this country to revolutionalize welfare services for our community of senior citizens in Sarawak, but utilizing our state’s wealth to build and fund retirement homes, retirement villages or communities.

A retirement village or community is a residential park designed for older adults with or without home and medical care and activities and socialization opportunities are often provided. The definition and concept of retirement villages or communities vary in different countries, but some of the characteristics typically are that the community must be age-restricted or age-qualified, residents must be partially or fully retired, and the community offers shared services or amenities.

In other countries, provident funds and savings are set up for their citizens to invest in the retirement homes and villages whereby they can rent and own their units in these retirement villages and communities to enjoy quality life in their retirement.

In Sarawak, our plentiful land and resources should allow us to provide such amenities and or support for our senior citizens community.

In fact, the state should also look into the investment and establishment of Holiday Retirement Community Living Centres, to cater for the growing global needs. Our all-year-round sunshine and cleaner environment would certainly be an attraction to those pensioners living in the temperate countries. The earnings will be enormous, and such earnings will certainly be helpful to fund such retirement homes and villages for our own senior citizens.

Call for release of Cost-Benefit Analysis of all hydropower dams

The International Hydropower Association is holding its Biennial Congress here in Kuching from 21-24 May 2013. At this Congress, no doubt, the Sarawak Government will showcase not only its existing hydropower mega-dams but also use the function as an endorsement from the IHA so as to justify the continued construction of further hydropower mega-dams.

No doubt, this Congress will also see the attendance of numerous hydropower dam contractors who will look forward to receiving a slice of the contracts.

Let me point out to this Honourable Dewan that all these mega-dams, from Batang Ai to Bakun, to Murum and now Baram; all these mega-dams are controversial, have destroyed native lands, have displaced thousands of natives and often with very questionable benefits.

The Batang Ai experience is a painful one. When the Asian Development Bank, which partly funded the Batang Ai Dam, reviewed the impact of the project in 1999, it found, among other things, that:

Resettlers’ average income from their plantations was substantially lower (about RM230 a month) compared with the income (RM523 a month) that was envisaged from plantations after 10 years. This also compared unfavourably with the average monthly family income of RM675 of those who continued to live in native customary rights lands in upstream Batang Ai (without the Project).

It was also observed that at the time of the ADB Mission, the incomes of the affected villagers were only restored or exceeded expectations due to employment in Kuching and other towns and at industrial locations.

In other words, the promised development turned out to be impoverishment which the resettled could only escape by out-migrating with unstated consequences to their communities, culture and way of life.

Further, we say that the benefits are questionable since the State Government has never concretely made known any of these ‘benefits’ to our economy apart from simply claiming that hydropower dams are not only clean environmentally but also needed to power the Sarawak Corridor of Renewable Energy. In the same vein, the Sarawak Government has for years simply papered over the real costs to the people and to the state treasury of implementing all these hydropower mega-dam projects.

Can the State Government thus disclose if there ever been any Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) undertaken on all these hydropower mega-dam projects, namely Batang Ai, Bakun, Murum and Baram? If YES, where are these CBAs?

Further, the following clarifications are found wanting:

(1)     Why have these CBAs not been publicly disclosed since these mega-dams are all      being funded by tax-payer funds?

(2)     Does the CBA list all the alternative projects considered in the power sector (along        with their respective values) but ultimately rejected in favour of hydropower mega-        dams?

(3)     What was the measure of value used and how was this measure quantified for all the    various stakeholders in all the various mega-dam projects? What was the discount rate       used for each of these mega-dam projects? What was the net present value of all the    project options?

(4)     How were long-term environmental and social costs quantified?

(5)     Does each CBA list who the stakeholders are; who stands to benefit and who stands to   lose and by how much?

If NO, why have there not been any CBAs conducted on these expensive mega-dam projects? Further, if no CBAs have been conducted on any of these mega-dam projects, how then can the Sarawak Government claim that all these mega-dams are going to benefit the economy and the people of Sarawak when they obviously don’t even know the benefits or the costs to the people and the economy?

It should of course be noted that an EIA or a Social Environmental Impact Assessment is not the same as a CBA.

A CBA is an important financial tool. Hence, undertaking a CBA is a necessary step undertaken by responsible decision-makers in making financial investment decisions for capital intensive projects; and more so when such investment decisions are long-term ones and involve a huge amount of public funds.

Mr Paul Low, the newly minted Honourable Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office who will be a panel speaker at this international conference has vowed to advocate and to examine the need for each project and that the issue of good governance and effective safeguards must be in place pre and post implementation, including independent monitors in each phase of the project, starting from the need analysis phase.

Unfortunately, good governance is already taking a backseat as one of the leaders of the affected indigenous communities, Encik Peter Kallang, has been barred from attending the IHA workshops which began on Monday. He is only allowed to attend the conference today after he had lodged a police report to register his protest. As a stakeholder, Peter Kallang and his folks who will be displaced by the construction of Baram Dam should be heard and be informed of the project. The safeguards for their rights and interests and the need analysis certainly rings empty.

Need for more equal representation of “one person one vote” in DUN and Parliament via improved re-delineation of constituencies

Throughout 2011 and 2012, the Parliamentary Select Committee on Electoral Reform (PSCER) had received and considered various suggestions from around the country to improve the electoral system which has long been criticized for being unfair and undemocratic.

In April 2012, PSCER had made 22 recommendations to the Parliament and the Election Commission as to the steps to take to improve the electoral process. Two of those recommendations (No. 19 and 20) on the distribution of seats in the Parliament for the states of Sabah and Sarawak and a balanced electoral delineation have implications for Sarawak.

I believe that it is our collective aspiration that the EC will heed all these recommendations seriously and do everything in their power to enhance the process of free, fair and democratic elections in our beloved state.

However, I wish to highlight one key issue which the EC is responsible for and which continues to undermine free, fair and democratic elections in Sarawak and Malaysia.

I am referring to the gerrymandering of electoral constituencies which has resulted in the commonly skewed and biased representation of the electorate in our state assemblies and the parliament.

The EC has said that there will be an electoral re-delineation exercise taking place in Sarawak later this year.

However, the Commission must come up with a more equitable distribution of weightage of voters amongst DUN seats in Sarawak than their currently biased delineations. At the moment, the weightage between many seats is grossly unfair, as shown in a table contained in the website of our parliament and PSCER, showing all the state and parliamentary seats in Sarawak and their weightages which was prepared and presented to PSCER by Prof Dr Andrew Aeria from UNIMAS in November 2011.

It is shown clearly that there are gross imbalances between relative seat sizes not only between urban-rural and urban-urban seats but also rural-rural seats. These imbalances shows up the anomaly of the EC’s claim to ensure that “the number of electors within each constituency in a state ought to be approximately equal except that, having regard to the greater difficulty of reaching electors in the districts and the other disadvantages facing rural constituencies, a measure of weightage for area ought to be given to such constituencies.”

The unjust imbalances are clear and obvious if we compare Batu Lintang with Satok (both adjoining urban seats in Kuching), Batu Danau and Pending (Rural-Urban seats compared) and Daro with Bengoh (both rural seats). The value of a vote in Satok (10431 voters) is more than twice the value of a vote in Batu Lintang (27833 voters). The value of a rural vote in Batu Danau (7636 voters) is four times that of a vote in Pending (29488 voters). And the value of a vote in rural Daro (7305 voters) is three times that of a similar vote in rural Bengoh (21955 voters).

In other words, the EC has no idea how to achieve “an approximately equal” weightage between constituencies or it is deliberately skewing rural seats. There is thus an urgent need to re-balance all these imbalanced constituencies. Indeed, respecting the principle of “one-person, one vote”, it is necessary to relook at the need to accord more weightage to rural constituencies than urban ones which has reach the extent of oppressive disparity. This after all is 2013 and not 1963 or 1973 when the EC Criteria of “approximately equal” weightage was drawn up.

Hence, with the re-delineation of constituencies in Sarawak coming up, this Honourable Dewan must record our informed view and strong recommendation that the EC breaks up the large urban constituencies and consolidates lesser populated constituencies to best reflect an average of about 14,000 voters per constituency in the state.

Indeed, there should also be no recourse to any geographic argument in maintaining gerrymandered small constituencies that grossly outweigh large urban constituencies anymore since wakil rakyats represent people and not empty terrestrial space. Hence, the recourse to drawing constituency boundaries based on geographic size is a red herring.

See Chee How

ADUN 

N11 Batu Lintang